[VIDEO] Sir Garfield Sobers - How do you rate him as a batsman?

[Chrish]

The guy feasted on minnows like India and Pakistan whose bowling was comparable to 90s Bangladesh at that time. Averaged 83 against India and 89 something against Pakistan.

Averaged 43 against Australia and 23.76 against New Zeland.. Also that average drops to 15 on difficult NZ wickets.. Averaged 60.64 against England which dropped to 53.52 in away venue.

Now some these numbers are still good but they are by no means good enough to make him the unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman of all time.. Overall bowling standard at that time was less than mediocre compared to 80s and 90s. Seems like his reputation is sheer exaggeration IMO..

What is your take?

 

[SamNJ]

That's surprisingly poor. Don't know how I didn't know it for so long.

 

[Acricketfan]

Nope. That title goes to . The guy doesn't deserve an average higher than 30.

 

[Chrish]

Nope. That title goes to . The guy doesn't deserve an average higher than 30.

There is no logical justification for earth-shattering reputation of Sobers the batsman..

 

[Neferpitou]

Yep, Inzamam was better.

 

[Junaids]

The guy feasted on minnows like India and Pakistan whose bowling was comparable to 90s Bangladesh at that time. Averaged 83 against India and 89 something against Pakistan.

Averaged 43 against Australia and 23.76 against New Zeland.. Also that average drops to 15 on difficult NZ wickets.. Averaged 60.64 against England which dropped to 53.52 in away venue.

Now some these numbers are still good but they are by no means good enough to make him the unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman of all time.. Overall bowling standard at that time was less than mediocre compared to 80s and 90s. Seems like his reputation is sheer exaggeration IMO..

What is your take?

I'm not even going to dignify this with words.

 

[Stallion__]

Overrated?

 

[Junaids]

By the way, your stats are misleading.

Late in his career Garry Sobers skippered the Rest of the World on tours to England (1970) and Australia (1971-71) to replace the banned South Africans. These were the best two teams that Sobers could play against, as South Africa refused to play against non-whites.

These matches originally had Test status, which was later removed and has reduced his overall career figures.

Those figures were:

1) "Tests" in England, 1971
5 Tests, topped the averages with 588 runs at an average of 73.50
Also took most wickets: 21 wickets at an average of 21.52

2) "Tests" in Australia, 1971-72
5 Tests, second in batting averages (above Graeme Pollock, Sunil Gavaskar and Zaheer Abbas) with 341 runs at an average of 48.50.
9 wickets at 48.30 (by now he was a 35 year old part-time bowler).

 

[Pace90]

BTW, I'm not saying anything about you but cricketing world, historian, commentrators and experts who saw him batting, were not stupid.

 

[MMHS]

I'm not even going to dignify this with words.

Come on J.........

I had my explanations on that 254 (which indeed a great knock, but nowhere near to what it is made out), retreating that 'll be uncalled for (I am sure, you have read that). Regarding the statements by ChappelI, you know better than me what was the hind side of that - first, I Chappel 'll never admit that they were hammered left, right & centre because of his attack wasn't that good but biggest reason was to take a dig at his biggest rival - Donald Gregory Bradman. I have seen that innings in about 3 hours recording, fairly detailed enough - a great innings indeed, but won't come in my top 10, but then, who am I, off curse.......

 

[MMHS]

BTW, I'm not saying anything about you but cricketing world, historian, commentrators and experts who saw him batting, were not stupid.

No, they were not. But, there was a "first time" impact.

Sobers was a Champion of his time - he did things that were unknown those days. Someone could bat at 3 & bat tremendously, could bowl decent fast-medium, could swing & then could bowl soin on Day 4/5; some one was brilliant athlete - could be a treat to watch at back-ward point (of 60s standard) at the same time was an outstanding slip catcher. In every sports, you 'll find few players well ahead of their time, a pioneer of the game - these players are often over praised, but someone from following generation could do same things better, often goes unnoticed/praised. In every sports that had been the case - take Federer/Lever; Fangio/Schumacher, Oewens/Carl Lewis, Graf/Navratilova, Jordan/Labron, Nicklus/Woods, Pele/Ronaldo (the fat one), Best/Ronaldo (the playboy one), Messi/Maradona... both Oewens & Leiws won the 100, 200 & long jump; but in 1936 there was not even imagination that an athelete can sprint & jump (though Oewen's time & distance is actually inferior to Lewis's contemporary females - Grifith Joyner & Jackie Joyner). Whatever Phelpes can achieve, he 'll hardly eclipse Mark Spitzs................

I find unique similarities between Sobers & two of his contemporaries - Bobby Fischer was a genius, probably rated as the most talented chess player ever, he was unique of his time, but I don't think at their best Fischer would have won over Karpov, Kasparov or even Karlsen. The second one was Ali - he brought boxing from a bone crashing blood game to an art, omeone who could "float like a butterfly, stings like a bee". But, I don't think at their prime Ali would have won against Holmes, Tyson, Leoenex Lewis ove even Hollifield, who knows, but I don't think so. It's the style & grace that Ali brought in the game among the butchers starting from Jack Johnson to Dempsey, Schmelling to Joe Lewis to Merciano to Liston that made him stand alone.

Besides, Sobers was head & shoulders above anyone of his time - 20 years down the line, he would have been compared everyday of the week with Imran, Botham, Kapil, Hadlee, Proctor, Rice..... even his own countrymen - Marshall & Stephenson.

 

[Junaids]

Come on J.........

I had my explanations on that 254 (which indeed a great knock, but nowhere near to what it is made out), retreating that 'll be uncalled for (I am sure, you have read that). Regarding the statements by ChappelI, you know better than me what was the hind side of that - first, I Chappel 'll never admit that they were hammered left, right & centre because of his attack wasn't that good but biggest reason was to take a dig at his biggest rival - Donald Gregory Bradman. I have seen that innings in about 3 hours recording, fairly detailed enough - a great innings indeed, but won't come in my top 10, but then, who am I, off curse.......

I accept a grain of truth in many of those observations.

But I'd just point out that Sobers played those series with Sunil Gavaskar, Graeme Pollock, Zaheer Abbas, Clive Lloyd and Barry Richards. And he out-batted them all - the only one who matched him overall across those two series was Rohan Kanhai.

 

[MMHS]

I accept a grain of truth in many of those observations.

But I'd just point out that Sobers played those series with Sunil Gavaskar, Graeme Pollock, Zaheer Abbas, Clive Lloyd and Barry Richards. And he out-batted them all - the only one who matched him overall across those two series was Rohan Kanhai.

That can't be a logic man.

You know, I don't write on personal agenda - Sobers's 1971-72 tour was built on 1 innings - take out that 254, he was averaging under 25 against a very average AUS attack, over burdening DK. Besides, barring Pollock (who I believed, joined from 3rd or 4th match) Gavasker & Zed were in their early 20s, touring 1st time in AUS (or did Z toured 70-71?), so was Barry. Lloyd was in his mid 20s, but still wasn't the Super Cat world knew from mid 70s.

Sobers was an outstanding entertainer, a champion of his time, but one of the most hyped cricketers ever. I don't want to bring stats, but everything that he tried was ballooned to unworthy proportion (he was a pathetic Captain, yet why was he chosen as the World XI Captain?). Take his 6 SIX - Malcom Nash was a medium pacer who was experimenting leg spin in last day afternoon, on one of the smallest County grounds, in a worthless match, destined to draw, choose the wrong person - I know that because I bothered to read the archive of Cricketers that edition, just to read the match report ........ you 'll never hear any old pundit to mention this.

 

[Random Aussie]

Unless you saw him play hard to take a call that he was overrated. I never saw him play but opinion about his ability from those who watched him play is pretty consistent.

 

[Robert]

What is your take?

Half way through a test match he went to a casino, stayed up all night, and then hit 150 against Trueman and Statham - England's best ever fast bowling pair - on no sleep.

Trueman described Sobers' batting as "magic".

 

[Stallion__]

He probably may not be second best batsman but he definitely there in top 5.

True, that in Sobers era, there weren't many ATG bowlers but that doesn't mean that bowling was easy during that period. There were some outstanding bowlers during that time. (Davidson, Benaud, McKenzie Trueman, Statham, Tyson, Laker, Wardle, Fazal Mehmood, Gupte not including WI bowlers). Infact the overall bowling averages during 50's, 60's and 70's were less than that of 80's.



Another thing, Pakistan maybe minnows in 50's as far batting is concerned. They were more than decent bowling unit. Infact, the bowling average of Pakistan is less than that of overall decade (excluding WI).



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=7;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

It only rise when we consider WI in the analysis. In other words, Sobers and co. are responsible for making a good Pakistani attack look ordinary.



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=7;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team


Infact, if there was any minnow team during his time, it was New Zealand, with W/L ration of less than 0.2 and bowling average of 34.



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=5;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

Its an anomaly, that he don't have a good record against probably worst team of his era, possibly he didn't play NZ in his prime years.


Have a decent record against Australia and excellent record against England, which probably were the best bowling team in his period. Not to mention his record against Pakistan and India (two next best teams after Aus/Eng considering Sobers never played against SA).


And Chappell is not the only one who is in awe of Sobers.

Benaud, Trueman, Gavasker, Davidson, Bird, Cozier, Martin Jerkins all rate him the best or one of the best cricketer/batsman ever.


Wasn't a great captain, or may not be technically or aesthetically as good as his rival Kanhai, but he has achieved more than enough not to be called over-rated. After all, there must be a reason, that he got 90 votes for being one of the Wisden cricketers of the year!

 

[Kakar]

The guy feasted on minnows like India and Pakistan whose bowling was comparable to 90s Bangladesh at that time. Averaged 83 against India and 89 something against Pakistan.

Averaged 43 against Australia and 23.76 against New Zeland.. Also that average drops to 15 on difficult NZ wickets.. Averaged 60.64 against England which dropped to 53.52 in away venue.

Now some these numbers are still good but they are by no means good enough to make him the unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman of all time.. Overall bowling standard at that time was less than mediocre compared to 80s and 90s. Seems like his reputation is sheer exaggeration IMO..

What is your take?

Wow such Chris Martin-esque stats.

 

[Bouncer]

By the way, your stats are misleading.

Late in his career Garry Sobers skippered the Rest of the World on tours to England (1970) and Australia (1971-71) to replace the banned South Africans. These were the best two teams that Sobers could play against, as South Africa refused to play against non-whites.

These matches originally had Test status, which was later removed and has reduced his overall career figures.

Those figures were:

1) "Tests" in England, 1971
5 Tests, topped the averages with 588 runs at an average of 73.50
Also took most wickets: 21 wickets at an average of 21.52

2) "Tests" in Australia, 1971-72
5 Tests, second in batting averages (above Graeme Pollock, Sunil Gavaskar and Zaheer Abbas) with 341 runs at an average of 48.50.
9 wickets at 48.30 (by now he was a 35 year old part-time bowler).

Have you read Sunny Days?

I picked it up started reading it prior to cricinfo being as good as it is now with archives being as complete as they are now. One of the reason I was very interested in the book was to find out why Sunil did so badly on the ROW v Aus tour after that successful trip to WI just months ago and I was surprised that how frequently Sunil kept saying that he was a victim of wrong decisions in the ROW tour. Zed on the other hand did better than SG on that tour.

 

[Junaids]

Have you read Sunny Days?

I picked it up started reading it prior to cricinfo being as good as it is now with archives being as complete as they are now. One of the reason I was very interested in the book was to find out why Sunil did so badly on the ROW v Aus tour after that successful trip to WI just months ago and I was surprised that how frequently Sunil kept saying that he was a victim of wrong decisions in the ROW tour. Zed on the other hand did better than SG on that tour.

No I haven't read it, but I will now! I loved Gavaskar, and thought that he was getting better than ever when he retired!

 

[Bhaijaan]

Great player but no where near Tendulkar or Bradman in terms of greatness.

 

[Bilal7]

Like Stallion has mentioned, Pakistan were hardly a poor bowling side back then. Isn't this when we had Fazal Mehmood bowling for us?

I'd rate him as one of the top five of all-time.

 

[Hitman]

Him and Jack Hobs are the top 2 contenders of being the best batsman since Bradman. My vote goes for Sobers.

 

[Chrish]

[MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION]

Good post! But what's the explanation for his average of 43.14 against Australia in 19 tests? Australia and England were two strong bowling units at that time. Also his average against England drops to 53.52 in away venue. Regarding that I will quote MMHS from another thread.

"Sobers played half of his career in WI where Umpires had to live with families in those tiny islands where everyone knows everybody........"

This statement probably has some truth into it considering Sobers' career average drops to 50.73 from godly average of 57.78 in away venues.

He may be an ATG but how can he be considered unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman ever??

 

[Chrish]

I'm not even going to dignify this with words.

You see, I am a skeptic by nature.. I don't just accept mere opinions passed down from generations as bona fide facts with unquestionable obedience. I like to question everything in life and seek justification..

 

[IndianWillow]

Sobers was a true champ for his age - he was the best batsman of the era, he could bowl pace as well as as spin, he was an excellent fielder by the standards of his day. Sobers represented everything that a cricketer could dream of.

But I don't really believe that any of the older era players are absolutely on par with great modern players simply because modern players are far more professional, enjoy better coaching and training methods, are under more pressure to perform (because they command much bigger salaries) etc. Greats of any era would be greats in any other era, but that does not necessarily mean we could transport them in time and expect them to beat guys of another era, and this applies especially to players from the earlier eras who played in an age with less professionalism, less competition, inferior training and coaching methods and so on.

 

[Scrolln]

I rate him as the third best West Indian batsman after Richards and Lara.

The Indian and Pakistani attacks that Sobers scored bucketloads against were absolutely pedestrian. Also keep in mind, Fazal Mahmood, though a Pakistani great, was a mediocre bowler overseas and a beast at home. He got hammered in that WI series where Sobers scored 370 odd, but Fazal absolutely humiliated Sobers when he came to visit Pakistan in 1958. He failed in all innings before he could finally compile a fifty in a dead rubber.

Kallis v/s Sobers is closer than what people will like you to believe.

 

[BD-fan]

Who said garbage threads cannot produce GREAT posts? Some very thought provoking posts here.

Comparing different era people are tricky. My criteria wouldn't be a direct comparison. I am 100% sure Bradman couldn't hit a Dilscoop. I don't think he could even have imagined in his playing days. Lillee couldn't bowl 6 yorkers in an over like Malinga. Any fielder before 70s could fly like Rhoads, McCullum, De Villiers. This doesn't make Dilshan better than Bradman, Malinga better than Lillee.

In sports, to have a level playing field, one must be compared with their own generation. If Bradman had a 40+ average than his compatriots then he was truly great. If Sobers were 20 years ahead of his time then he is truly among the greatest.

Like MJ said, "Without a Miken, there is no Wilt. Without an Oscar, there is no Dr. J. Without Dr. J, there is no Michael."

With the same tune I say, Without an Ali, there is no Holyfield or a Tyson. The past greats are not over-hyped.

 

[CricFan2012]

Don't rate him, never seen him play so why rate him? Just like i dont rate Bradman

 

[Bilal7]

Isn't this the same poster who said that Michael Holding was not a great bowler? Is this disrespect of legends only reserved for the ones from West Indies or were guys like Gavasker and Kapil Dev, only Indian greats too?

 

[Chrish]

Isn't this the same poster who said that Michael Holding was not a great bowler? Is this disrespect of legends only reserved for the ones from West Indies or were guys like Gavasker and Kapil Dev, only Indian greats too?

Kapil is Indian legend only while Gavaskar is a universal one.. Lara, viv, Ambrose and Marshall are also universal ones.,

 

[Bilal7]

Kapil is Indian legend only while Gavaskar is a universal one.. Lara, viv, Ambrose and Marshall are also universal ones.,

So are Holding and Sobers.

 

[Chrish]

So are Holding and Sobers.

Never said sobers is wi legend only..

 

[in_cutter]

For an allrounder, those stats are amazing.

 

[Chrish]

Sobers was a true champ for his age - he was the best batsman of the era, he could bowl pace as well as as spin, he was an excellent fielder by the standards of his day. Sobers represented everything that a cricketer could dream of.

But I don't really believe that any of the older era players are absolutely on par with great modern players simply because modern players are far more professional, enjoy better coaching and training methods, are under more pressure to perform (because they command much bigger salaries) etc. Greats of any era would be greats in any other era, but that does not necessarily mean we could transport them in time and expect them to beat guys of another era, and this applies especially to players from the earlier eras who played in an age with less professionalism, less competition, inferior training and coaching methods and so on.

Sobers' strike rate as a blower was in 90 even during tuk tuk test era.. Too high for so called greatest all rounder of all time

 

[Hitman]

Sobers' strike rate as a blower was in 90 even during tuk tuk test era.. Too high for so called greatest all rounder of all time

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...-on-Gary-Sobers-s-unmatched-all-round-ability

 

[BD-fan]

Sobers' strike rate as a blower was in 90 even during tuk tuk test era.. Too high for so called greatest all rounder of all time

Opening post you are putting Sobers down, now you are praising him. What gives? Change of heart already?

That stat you mentioned should put him among the very best. That would negate any argument you have against him as one of the greatest to pick up a willow.

 

[Hitman]

Read this thread - http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/491636.html

 

[Chrish]

Opening post you are putting Sobers down, now you are praising him. What gives? Change of heart already?

That stat you mentioned should put him among the very best. That would negate any argument you have against him as one of the greatest to pick up a willow.

Humm.. Looks like u have reading comprehension issues .. Read again..

 

[Bilal7]

Opening post you are putting Sobers down, now you are praising him. What gives? Change of heart already?

That stat you mentioned should put him among the very best. That would negate any argument you have against him as one of the greatest to pick up a willow.

He meant bowling SR.

Sobers' strike rate as a blower was in 90 even during tuk tuk test era.. Too high for so called greatest all rounder of all time

He's not the greatest because of that reason, Imran Khan would arguably take that crown, but that doesn't diminish his stature as a batsman. He may not be #2 and not a lot of people say that he is, but he's surely in the top five.

 

[Stallion__]

[MENTION=138483]
But what's the explanation for his average of 43.14 against Australia in 19 tests? Australia and England were two strong bowling units at that time. Also his average against England drops to 53.52 in away venue.

Dude, you are assuming as if these averages of #11. Even Sachin have averages of 42 against South Africa and Pakistan which were arguably the two of the three best bowling units of his time.

And for his average of 53 in England, he has produced his best career performance (in a series) in England against them in 1966. That series was probably the best all-round show a player in a particular series (arguably even better than Imran 1982 and Botham 1981).

Runs : 722 @ 103
Wickets : 20 @ 27

Regarding that I will quote MMHS from another thread.

"Sobers played half of his career in WI where Umpires had to live with families in those tiny islands where everyone knows everybody........"

This wasn't the case only in West Indies. That used to happen everywhere, including India, Pakistan and England. And every ATG of pre-neutral umpiring era is a beneficiary of this.
And again, away average of 50, is hardly anything less than great.

This statement probably has some truth into it considering Sobers' career average drops to 50.73 from godly average of 57.78 in away venues.

As I mentioned earlier, NZ was the weakest team of his era, and its aberrant facet of Sobers career that he don't have good record against NZ considering he has supreme record against other better cricketing nations.

If we exclude that abnormality from his record, he averages 56 away from home.




http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

He may be an ATG but how can he be considered unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman ever??

And you know, the most striking aspect of Sobers was that he was a real match-winner. He scored his runs when his team needed them most. Infact out of his 26 centuries, only once he has ended up being on the losing side.

Despite having greats like Kanhai, Fredricks, Kallicharan, Rowe and 3 W's early in his career, WI were heavily reliant on Sobers. On rare occasions when he failed, his team usually don't win that match.


Sobers record in when WI don't lose



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...sult=3;result=4;template=results;type=batting

Sobers record when WI lose



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...efault;result=2;template=results;type=batting


As a batsman alone, as I said earlier, he may not be unrivaled second best, but he is right up there in top 5.

 

[Mamoon]

He is unanimously regarded as the best all-rounder of all time by pretty much everyone, so there must be something about him that is not capture in his statistics which are far from shabby anyway.

 

[TestMatch]

reat player but no where near Tendulkar or Bradman in terms of greatness.

He was better than both. And the bowling SR quoted above is based on a handful of recorded games. We dont have complete SR stats for him.

 

[Stallion__]

After all, there must be a reason, that he got 90 votes for being one of the Wisden cricketers of the year!

Century*

 

[Bhaijaan]

He was better than both. And the bowling SR quoted above is based on a handful of recorded games. We dont have complete SR stats for him.

Tendulkar-Bradman
Daylight
Sobers
Rest

 

[Chrish]

Dude, you are assuming as if these averages of #11. Even Sachin have averages of 42 against South Africa and Pakistan which were arguably the two of the three best bowling units of his time.

And for his average of 53 in England, he has produced his best career performance (in a series) in England against them in 1966. That series was probably the best all-round show a player in a particular series (arguably even better than Imran 1982 and Botham 1981).

Runs : 722 @ 103
Wickets : 20 @ 27




This wasn't the case only in West Indies. That used to happen everywhere, including India, Pakistan and England. And every ATG of pre-neutral umpiring era is a beneficiary of this.
And again, away average of 50, is hardly anything less than great.





As I mentioned earlier, NZ was the weakest team of his era, and its aberrant facet of Sobers career that he don't have good record against NZ considering he has supreme record against other better cricketing nations.

If we exclude that abnormality from his record, he averages 56 away from home.


View attachment 57143

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting





And you know, the most striking aspect of Sobers was that he was a real match-winner. He scored his runs when his team needed them most. Infact out of his 26 centuries, only once he has ended up being on the losing side.

Despite having greats like Kanhai, Fredricks, Kallicharan, Rowe and 3 W's early in his career, WI were heavily reliant on Sobers. On rare occasions when he failed, his team usually don't win that match.


Sobers record in when WI don't lose

View attachment 57144

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...sult=3;result=4;template=results;type=batting

Sobers record when WI lose

View attachment 57145

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...efault;result=2;template=results;type=batting


As a batsman alone, as I said earlier, he may not be unrivaled second best, but he is right up there in top 5.

Fred Trueman, the most prominent bowler during that era was considered unplayable in English pitch conditions where he averaged 20.04. Garry averaged only 35.67 in 18 innings in England in which he had to face Trueman.

It was only after both Trueman and Statham retired did Sobers' average went sky-high.. Here is the series where Garry averaged 100+ when both of these English maestros were gone.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60415.html

Here is what happened when he ran into Trueman..

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60375.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60398.html

Sobers was indeed very good at taking advantage of opportunities..

 

[gibsyhesperis]

As someone rightly said, a useless opening premise can lead to some interesting posts. Commentators and ex-players of repute who saw both Sobers and the more modern greats, consistently place him as one of the greatest players of all time. The obsession some people have with statistics makes them miss so much of the joy the game can bring. Really, would one rather watch Ken Barrington or David Gower ? Barrington had a significantly better test average yet a Gower cover drive defined the quintessential beauty of the game

 

[zabalestmsm]

By looking at some of his videos he seemed quite brave by his body language and in his shots selection. His average is great. But to be considered among the top 5 he must have a great record against the best bowlers of his time.

 

[Neferpitou]

Great player but no where near Richards or Bradman in terms of greatness.

Why do you say that?

 

[zabalestmsm]

But those who have seen him closely in those times can judge fairly.

 

[MMHS]

Fred Trueman, the most prominent bowler during that era was considered unplayable in English pitch conditions where he averaged 20.04. Garry averaged only 35.67 in 18 innings in England in which he had to face Trueman.

It was only after both Trueman and Statham retired did Sobers' average went sky-high.. Here is the series where Garry averaged 100+ when both of these English maestros were gone.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60415.html

Here is what happened when he ran into Trueman..

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60375.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60398.html

Sobers was indeed very good at taking advantage of opportunities..

Actually, by 1963 Trueman was 32+, still a great bowler, but he was just about Fast-medium. I think, by mid 60s ENG attack was poorest among the top tier Test teams. In fact, 1961 Ashes was the last Ashes when World's undisputed top 2 sides fought for the Ashes. Sobers had great records against ENG after 1963, but only world class bowler in that English generation was John Snow, who troubled him most.

Sobers was a great entertainer, he played his game in a time when batting was meant to be patience, technique, time on the wicket - games were longer (often 600+ overs) which allowed batsmen to bat at a snail's pace & accumulate run. In that time he was someone who 'll take it to the bowlers, play exciting shots & often 'll lose his wicket to attacking shots. Lot's of analysts tries to fool people that had Sobers played for record he would have done this, that .... which I don't buy. Sobers was Sobers, because he played like Gary Sobers - had he tried to play out of his nature, he won't had been Sobers & chances are high that his stats would have been inferior.

Ken Barrington had an average of 58+ over 6,000+ Test runs from that generation, hardly anyone recalls him, as he would often make Boycott look like Sehwag. It's not that Sobers played his way because he didn't care for the record, rather it wasn't his natural game - I can point few innings, where the order of the day was to bat out sessions to save the match, he failed; bat-pad defensive game wasn't his strength - he 'll play his natural game regardless of the situation.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

I can't honestly say. Never watched the guy bat. You can hardly find videos on Youtube either. It's one of those generation things that you really can't say. It's the same scenario with the Bradman case. Stats alone cannot tell the full story.

 

[Chrish]

Actually, by 1963 Trueman was 32+, still a great bowler, but he was just about Fast-medium. I think, by mid 60s ENG attack was poorest among the top tier Test teams. In fact, 1961 Ashes was the last Ashes when World's undisputed top 2 sides fought for the Ashes. Sobers had great records against ENG after 1963, but only world class bowler in that English generation was John Snow, who troubled him most.

Sobers was a great entertainer, he played his game in a time when batting was meant to be patience, technique, time on the wicket - games were longer (often 600+ overs) which allowed batsmen to bat at a snail's pace & accumulate run. In that time he was someone who 'll take it to the bowlers, play exciting shots & often 'll lose his wicket to attacking shots. Lot's of analysts tries to fool people that had Sobers played for record he would have done this, that .... which I don't buy. Sobers was Sobers, because he played like Gary Sobers - had he tried to play out of his nature, he won't had been Sobers & chances are high that his stats would have been inferior.

Ken Barrington had an average of 58+ over 6,000+ Test runs from that generation, hardly anyone recalls him, as he would often make Boycott look like Sehwag. It's not that Sobers played his way because he didn't care for the record, rather it wasn't his natural game - I can point few innings, where the order of the day was to bat out sessions to save the match, he failed; bat-pad defensive game wasn't his strength - he 'll play his natural game regardless of the situation.

That's why I said Sobers' average of 60 against England is misleading.. England had the strongest bowling attack in Trueman, Statham and Tony Lock. It's only after these players were gone, Sobers' average drastically went up.. Averaged 100 something when their bowling was all time low at that period..

 

[Chrish]

That's why I said Sobers' average of 60 against England is misleading.. England had the strongest bowling attack in Trueman, Statham and Tony Lock. It's only after these players were gone, Sobers' average drastically went up.. Averaged 100 something when their bowling was all time low at that period..

I mean averaged 100 something during that particular series of 6 tests.. Not overall of course.

 

[WrexEverything]

There's some complete rubbish in this thread, seriously.

Just going to respond to the OP first of all

The guy feasted on minnows like India and Pakistan whose bowling was comparable to 90s Bangladesh at that time. Averaged 83 against India and 89 something against Pakistan.

Absolute nonsense.

India in Sobers' era produced some of the greatest spinners in our history like Subhash Gupte, Bishan Bedi, Erappalli Prasanna, Chandrashekhar and Venkatraghavan. Sobers absolutely dominated them.

On Pakistan, Sobers scored his 365 and followed up with two sensational hundreds in the very next match against an attack that comprised of Fazal Mahmood and Khan Mohammad. If you guys haven't heard about them, I'm sad because it just shows your lack of appreciation for your own greats before the Imrans and Wasims and Waqars. Fazal is one of the all time great Pakistan bowlers with 139 wickets in 34 matches at an average of 24.70. Khan Mohammad was exceptional too, and only a lack of a long career prevents him from being remembered as a great. He took 54 wickets in just 13 tests at an average of 23.92. But apparently these bowlers are as bad Bangladesh's trundlers. I don' even know how to react to such a statement.

Averaged 43 against Australia and 23.76 against New Zeland.

The average against Australia is actually extremely good when you consider the phenomenal attacks he faced. He regularly played against Davidson, Benaud, Meckiff, Kline, Makay. He even scored a couple of fifties against Lindwall and Miller early in his career.

The average against NZ is poor, but who doesn't have a bogey country somewhere? Sachin averages 35 against SA at home, Lara was poor vs NZ, Kallis sucked in England and SL, Sangakkara has always been mediocre in India, and SA. Using this one blemish in his record is pointless. And anyway, NZ were a pretty poor side in Sobers' time because this was before Hadlee debuted in the 70s and made the team formidable. So even if Sobers had scored runs against them, you would have discounted them saying NZ were a bad team. This is hypocrisy, plain and simple.

Averaged 60.64 against England which dropped to 53.52 in away venue.

What's you point? Those are exceptional numbers.

Now some these numbers are still good but they are by no means good enough to make him the unrivaled 2nd greatest batsman of all time.. Overall bowling standard at that time was less than mediocre compared to 80s and 90s. Seems like his reputation is sheer exaggeration IMO..

Again, that's just false. After the second world war ended, the 60s and 70s produced some of the greatest bowlers the world has ever seen. Apart from 90s no era has produced so many phenomenal bowlers. Australia as I menioned, Davidoson, Benaud, Meckiff, and later Lilee. Pakistan: Fazal and Khan. India: Subhash Gupte and the spin quartet, England: Two of their greatest ever pacers in Trueman and Snow, in addition to Old, Statham,etc.

All these are excellent attacks. As good as anything in world cricket today, maybe even better than most.

Sobers imo is one of the top 5 best batsmen ever. You people are entitled to your opinion that you can't rate him because you didn't see him. That's fine, I respect that. But let's not descend to complete falsehood and lies to push some agenda about how players of previous eras were inferior. Just stop it.For me, the footage we have of Sobers, the numerous great innings he played against great attacks, the glowing testimonies of greats from his time are proof enough fr me that he was phenomenal.

I'll just end with one of my favourite stats ever. Sobers between 1957 and 1968, averaged a ridiculous 74 with the bat. Over 11 years

Thank you and good night.

 

[WrexEverything]

Fred Trueman, the most prominent bowler during that era was considered unplayable in English pitch conditions where he averaged 20.04. Garry averaged only 35.67 in 18 innings in England in which he had to face Trueman.

It was only after both Trueman and Statham retired did Sobers' average went sky-high.. Here is the series where Garry averaged 100+ when both of these English maestros were gone.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60415.html

Here is what happened when he ran into Trueman..

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60375.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60398.html

Sobers was indeed very good at taking advantage of opportunities..

You do realise there are flaws in all batsmen's records?

Sachin averaged 35 against Donald.

He averaged 37 in matches vs McGrath.

Lara averaged 34 vs Donald and in 30s vs Wasim and Waqar.

Everyone has flaws in their stats and it's just nitpicking to selectively point out a few of them to somehow prove one batsman is inferior.

 

[Stallion__]

Fred Trueman, the most prominent bowler during that era was considered unplayable in English pitch conditions where he averaged 20.04. Garry averaged only 35.67 in 18 innings in England in which he had to face Trueman.

It was only after both Trueman and Statham retired did Sobers' average went sky-high.. Here is the series where Garry averaged 100+ when both of these English maestros were gone.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60415.html

Here is what happened when he ran into Trueman..

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60375.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sl/engine/series/60398.html

You need to understand few things. I didn't wanted to bring Sachin (who is consider as a standard of an ATG) in but since you have forced me, now I have to.


Sachin record against Australia when McGrath not playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Australia when McGrath playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Sri Lanka when Murali not playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Sri Lanka when Murali playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=2041;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Pakistan when Wasim not playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Pakistan when Wasim playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=1775;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against England when Anderson not playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against England when Anderson playing





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...r_involve=10829;template=results;type=batting


Do you notice the trend? Sachin has significantly lesser averages when best bowler of the team is playing.

These bowlers become ATGs because they trouble the best batsman of the opposition, batsman become ATGs when they score some runs against best bowler of the opposition.

Considering this mutual relationship, when an ATG batsman plays and ATG bowler, he ends up with an average lesser than his career average but greater than that of bowler's career average.

Thats how it goes. You can't expect a batsman to master all the bowlers of his era and vice versa for the bowlers.


Btw Sobers still average 53 overall against England when Trueman was playing, considering the home tests as well. Just like you, I could downplay Trueman since he struggled to get Sobers out in WI, we can do similar nitpicking to demean all ATG's but thats the way it is.





http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...yer_involve=927;template=results;type=batting

Sobers was indeed very good at taking advantage of opportunities..

Well, considering that you already have degraded Holding and Sanga, and now its Sobers turn, its improbable that you will understand what ATG stands for. I already have given enough time to this thread, with little effect on you. If you come up with similar pedantic analysis, I may not be motivated to reply you again.

 

[Stallion__]

I didn't wanted to bring Sachin

don't wanted*.

Actually, while I was writing my post, WrexEverything has already elaborated what I wanted to explain. I might not have posted mine had I read Wrex's post.

 

[Scrolln]

Trueman has mentioned in interviews that Kanhai, the 2 W's and Sobers were the most difficult to bowl to.

I used these to take statistics of batsman A involving bowler a/b/c quite seriously until i decided to delve deeper.

SRT in the 2 ODI's including Ajmal averages 60+, but we all know how badly he struggled against Ajmal.

However against Donald, SRT averaged a measly 32, and he considers SRT the greatest batsman he ever bowled to.

Sobers was the best of his era, and like all other batsmen he did feast against weaker attacks. But his legacy as the greatest cricketer of all time (as many consider him to be) is over-rated.

 

[Robert]

I'll just end with one of my favourite stats ever. Sobers between 1957 and 1968, averaged a ridiculous 74 with the bat. Over 11 years

Sure. What a lot of people don't know is that he came into the WI side as a SLA spinner first, and #8 batsman. In short order he became the best batsman of his era. Then he found out that he could bowl fast left-arm too, and often opened the bowling with Wes Hall.

 

[Stallion__]

Sure. What a lot of people don't know is that he came into the WI side as a SLA spinner first, and #8 batsman. In short order he became the best batsman of his era. Then he found out that he could bowl fast left-arm too, and often opened the bowling with Wes Hall.

Here we go. The argument of Sobers not being good enough with the ball to hold his place in the side (which is the classical definition of an allrounder) is put to rest.

 

[MMHS]

Here we go. The argument of Sobers not being good enough with the ball to hold his place in the side (which is the classical definition of an allrounder) is put to rest.

Actually, the story was a bit different. WI in 1950s & 1960s were almost a similar attack (in formation) like IND. They used to play with 2 pacers & 3 spinners with few all-rounders. Goddard, Worrell, Sobers & Collie Smith were the all-rounders while WW Hall used to take the new ball with Griffith & sometimes Roy Gilchrist. And WI had the abundance of spinners - Ramadhin, Gibbs, Valentine...... Griffith was a chucker, while Gilchrits always struggled with fitness and while on tour, WI was often cautious about playing Griffith.

Sobers indeed opened with Hall, but that has nothing to do with him being good enough to play simply as bowler, that's the over exaggeration. For that matter, Worrell also opened the bowling in 50s for WI & Ganguly opened for IND in 1990s. His bowling average was massively boosted by lots of IND bashing & playing in ENG, where he did swing the new ball. Great player, a champion of his time, but one of the highest over hyped player for the brand of cricket he played & lack of competition in contemporary world.

 

[Chrish]

You need to understand few things. I didn't wanted to bring Sachin (who is consider as a standard of an ATG) in but since you have forced me, now I have to.


Sachin record against Australia when McGrath not playing


View attachment 57154


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Australia when McGrath playing


View attachment 57155


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Sri Lanka when Murali not playing


View attachment 57156


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Sri Lanka when Murali playing


View attachment 57157


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=2041;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Pakistan when Wasim not playing


View attachment 57158


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against Pakistan when Wasim playing


View attachment 57159


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=1775;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against England when Anderson not playing


View attachment 57160


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...volve_type=none;template=results;type=batting


Sachin record against England when Anderson playing


View attachment 57161


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...r_involve=10829;template=results;type=batting


Do you notice the trend? Sachin has significantly lesser averages when best bowler of the team is playing.

These bowlers become ATGs because they trouble the best batsman of the opposition, batsman become ATGs when they score some runs against best bowler of the opposition.

Considering this mutual relationship, when an ATG batsman plays and ATG bowler, he ends up with an average lesser than his career average but greater than that of bowler's career average.

Thats how it goes. You can't expect a batsman to master all the bowlers of his era and vice versa for the bowlers.


Btw Sobers still average 53 overall against England when Trueman was playing, considering the home tests as well. Just like you, I could downplay Trueman since he struggled to get Sobers out in WI, we can do similar nitpicking to demean all ATG's but thats the way it is.


View attachment 57162


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...yer_involve=927;template=results;type=batting





Well, considering that you already have degraded Holding and Sanga, and now its Sobers turn, its improbable that you will understand what ATG stands for. I already have given enough time to this thread, with little effect on you. If you come up with similar pedantic analysis, I may not be motivated to reply you again.

I don't wanna turn this into Sobers vs Sachin debate.. But I will point out few things. The fact that you had to Bring Mcgrath, Wasim, Donald, Murali, Anderson only proves 90s bowling standard was simply much tougher than 60s because guess what? Trueman was the only world class bowler by today's standard, and even then Sobers' stats don't measure up against him against the best in business. Facing him in England wasn't the same as facing him in WI. Given his bowling average, he simply was a different bowler in English conditions.

Regarding Sachin, he faced plethora of great bowlers throughout his career. As for averaging goes, he averaged 81.5 against Steyn in South Africa in 2010 series. Steyn is arguably superior bowler than Donald, and facing him on bouncy SA wickets was not any less difficult than facing Mcgrath or Wasim IMO.. And yet he succeeded. SRT doesn't have anything to prove at least in my book. As I said, I am not gonna turn this into another Sachin thread.

 

[Stallion__]

Actually, the story was a bit different. WI in 1950s & 1960s were almost a similar attack (in formation) like IND. They used to play with 2 pacers & 3 spinners with few all-rounders. Goddard, Worrell, Sobers & Collie Smith were the all-rounders while WW Hall used to take the new ball with Griffith & sometimes Roy Gilchrist. And WI had the abundance of spinners - Ramadhin, Gibbs, Valentine...... Griffith was a chucker, while Gilchrits always struggled with fitness and while on tour, WI was often cautious about playing Griffith.

Sobers indeed opened with Hall, but that has nothing to do with him being good enough to play simply as bowler, that's the over exaggeration. For that matter, Worrell also opened the bowling in 50s for WI & Ganguly opened for IND in 1990s. His bowling average was massively boosted by lots of IND bashing & playing in ENG, where he did swing the new ball. Great player, a champion of his time, but one of the highest over hyped player for the brand of cricket he played & lack of competition in contemporary world.

The fact that he break through in the team as a bowler, batting at #9, means he have decent enough ability as a bowler. Ganguly and Worrel didn't.

Has 50+ wickets against Australia as well. Him being successful in India and England actually shows his versatility, could bowl left arm orthodox, chinaman and medium pace.

Just like Kallis, he could have managed a better bowling record had he played purely as a bowler. He still have bowling average similar to Harbhajan and SR similar to that of Ramadhin and Valentine (who played solely as spinners).

 

[Chrish]

Well, considering that you already have degraded Holding and Sanga, and now its Sobers turn, its improbable that you will understand what ATG stands for. I already have given enough time to this thread, with little effect on you. If you come up with similar pedantic analysis, I may not be motivated to reply you again.

Well my friend, this is a forum where people express their opinions. This is not a scholarly debate. We all are jokers killing trying to kill a time. So, no need to take things personally.

I have at least the ability to exercise free will and question anything. I am not gonna accept everything in life just because my daddy said so!

 

[Stallion__]

Well my friend, this is a forum where people express their opinions. This is not a scholarly debate. We all are jokers killing trying to kill a time. So, no need to take things personally.

I have at least the ability to exercise free will and question anything. I am not gonna accept everything in life just because my daddy said so!

I am sorry if I sound personal (I didn't mean to be), but its true that posters get stereotyped by their posts. Thats the pattern or nature of your posts I noticed, I just brought that up.

Btw, just because you like to question things, doesn't mean that you never listen your dad/elders or they are always wrong even if they provides you thousands of reasons to prove they are right.

And you are right, we are here to have some fun, but the fact is, you are unwilling to accept anything, and this isn't likely to change even if I post 10 more posts to convince you. Thats why I don't find this discussion with you engaging anymore.

 

[Chrish]

I am sorry if I sound personal (I didn't mean to be), but its true that posters get stereotyped by their posts. Thats the pattern or nature of your posts I noticed, I just brought that up.

Btw, just because you like to question things, doesn't mean that you never listen your dad/elders or they are always wrong even if they provides you thousands of reasons to prove they are right.

And you are right, we are here to have some fun, but the fact is, you are unwilling to accept anything, and this isn't likely to change even if I post 10 more posts to convince you. Thats why I don't find this discussion with you engaging anymore.

I actually did learn quite bit of things here, especially from reading your posts You see, 50s and 60s era has been the most mysterious one. I mean not a lot of people know about what exactly happened during that time period. It's rarely discussed over here or the other forums.

If everyone accepts Sobers was the greatest and never starts discussion, we simply won't know anything about Cricket during those two decades..

 

[MenInG]

Happy 84th Birthday to Sir Garfield St Aubrun Sobers!

 

[Bhaijaan]

Happy Birthday to Sir Garfield.

On this occassion I choose not to indulge in comparison talk. Sir Garfield is incomparable as a cricketer and as a man.

 

[therealAB]

2nd Greatest bat of all time

 

[Abdullah719]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8u7A0MvB9eg" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>.

 

[MenInG]

Happy Birthday to the great man!

 

[Mp812]

What matters is how players and spectators of the 60s era rated him. They rated him highly and that is an indicator in itself.

Comparing players of different era is not fair as many other factors come in to play.

For example if one had the cameras and computer analytic tools of today when Viv Richards was playing.... it is very likely many of Richards technique weakness would have been exposed and exploited more . Viv stats would be different.
Similarly for Sobers.

 

[sweep_shot]

Never got to see him live as I was not born then.

He is widely considered as one of the best all-rounders of all time.

 

[James]

Happy birthday Sir

 

[Hitman]

Happy B’day to the greatest cricketer ever.

 

[Chrish]

He probably may not be second best batsman but he definitely there in top 5.

True, that in Sobers era, there weren't many ATG bowlers but that doesn't mean that bowling was easy during that period. There were some outstanding bowlers during that time. (Davidson, Benaud, McKenzie Trueman, Statham, Tyson, Laker, Wardle, Fazal Mehmood, Gupte not including WI bowlers). Infact the overall bowling averages during 50's, 60's and 70's were less than that of 80's.

View attachment 57123

Another thing, Pakistan maybe minnows in 50's as far batting is concerned. They were more than decent bowling unit. Infact, the bowling average of Pakistan is less than that of overall decade (excluding WI).

View attachment 57124

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=7;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

It only rise when we consider WI in the analysis. In other words, Sobers and co. are responsible for making a good Pakistani attack look ordinary.

View attachment 57125

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=7;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team


Infact, if there was any minnow team during his time, it was New Zealand, with W/L ration of less than 0.2 and bowling average of 34.

View attachment 57126

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...m=5;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

Its an anomaly, that he don't have a good record against probably worst team of his era, possibly he didn't play NZ in his prime years.


Have a decent record against Australia and excellent record against England, which probably were the best bowling team in his period. Not to mention his record against Pakistan and India (two next best teams after Aus/Eng considering Sobers never played against SA).


And Chappell is not the only one who is in awe of Sobers.

Benaud, Trueman, Gavasker, Davidson, Bird, Cozier, Martin Jerkins all rate him the best or one of the best cricketer/batsman ever.


Wasn't a great captain, or may not be technically or aesthetically as good as his rival Kanhai, but he has achieved more than enough not to be called over-rated. After all, there must be a reason, that he got 90 votes for being one of the Wisden cricketers of the year!

How have you been old friend? I was going over this thread and remember your fabulous posts. Hope life is good

 

[atreus]

I'll let you decide who are minnows and who aren't

2000s west indies played 96 matches , took 1265 wickets at 40.85 each with SR or 78.

2010s England played 121 tests , took 1816 wickets at 34.88 Each with SR of 65.7.

2000s sri Lanka played 79 matches , took 1189 wickets at 33.36 with SR of 68.0.

2000s newzealand played 67 matches , took 934 wickets , at average of 37.2 and SR of 70.8.

2000s Pakistan played 75 tests , took 1089 wickets , at 36.85 each with a SR of 69.

Bangladesh of 2000s played 53 matches , took 451 wickets , at an average of 53 with a strike rate of 90.7.

2000s South Africa played 96 matches , took 1534 wickets , at an average of 32.56 with a atrike rate of 63.2.

1960s india played a grand total of 47 matches , took 652 wickets , at an average of 33.91 with a strike rate of 87.1.

1960s pakistan played 30 matches , took 358 wickets at an average of 35.72 and SR of 89.2.

Australia in 1960s played 67 matches , took 1068 wickets , at average of 32.6 with a SR of 81.8.

England in 1960s played 87 matches , took 1332 wickets , at average of 30.65 with SR of 78.6.

west indies of 1960s played 49 matches , took 799 wickets at average of 31.81 and strike rate of 79.2.
new Zealand of 1960s played 35 matches , took 465 wickets , at 32.43 average and 75.8 strike rate.